the eighteenth century

British Civilisation: Economic and social change in Britain 1750-1850

The Eighteenth Century

General introduction: some food for thought......................................................................................3

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SITUATION IN BRITAIN IN THE 1740s & 1750s....................................4

I. Content and Prosperity or Defoe’s England................................................................................4

II. Trade........................................................................................................................................... 4

A. Internal trade..............................................................................................................................4

B. Overseas trade............................................................................................................................5

III. Financial and banking system.....................................................................................................7

A. Financial system.........................................................................................................................7

B. Banking system...........................................................................................................................7

IV. Agriculture..................................................................................................................................7

A. Before 1750.................................................................................................................................9

V. Industry:....................................................................................................................................10

A. Coal mining:..............................................................................................................................10

B. Iron........................................................................................................................................... 10

C. Other manufactured goods.......................................................................................................11

1. The social hierarchy of industrial classes..............................................................................12

2. General conclusion................................................................................................................13

THE POPULATION AND SOCIETY – THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE........................................................14

I. The population – demography...................................................................................................14

II. Society – rural society, urban society.......................................................................................14

III. Freedom and culture.................................................................................................................15

Annex................................................................................................................................................. 16

I. Historians & Writers:................................................................................................................16

A. Daniel Defoe (1660-1731):........................................................................................................16

B. Christopher Alan Bayly (19**-20**):..........................................................................................16

C. G.M. Trevelyan (1876-1962):....................................................................................................16

D. J.H. Plumb:................................................................................................................................16

E. Overton:....................................................................................................................................17

F. Lord Engle................................................................................................................................17

II. Inventors................................................................................................................................... 17

A. Arthur Young (1741-1820):.......................................................................................................17

B. Lord Ernle (1851-1937):............................................................................................................18

C. Jethro Tull (1674-1741):............................................................................................................18

D. Lord Charles Townshend (1674-1738):.....................................................................................18

E. Thomas William Coke (1754-1842):..........................................................................................18

F. Collings Brothers:.....................................................................................................................19

G. Denis Papin (1647-1712):..........................................................................................................19

H. Thomas Savery (1650-1715):....................................................................................................20

I. Thomas Newcomen (1663-1729):..............................................................................................20

III. Historical Figures.....................................................................................................................20

Mr. Darribehaude 2007/2008 1

British Civilisation: The Eighteenth Century

A. George II (1683-1760:...............................................................................................................20

B. Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658):................................................................................................21

C. Abraham Darby (1678-1717):....................................................................................................21

D. John Wesley (1703-1791):.........................................................................................................22

Mr. Darribehaude Semester 3 2


General introduction: some food for thoughtGeneral introduction: some food for thought

In British history, the years between the 1760's and 1830 are considered as crucial years of the Industrial Revolution. (Concerning the events in the 18th and 19th centuries, the expression Industrial Revolution must be written with capital initials.) This expression is misleading because there have always been industrial transformations: it has been a continuing process throughout history. (For instance, the invention of the wheel was one industrial revolution.)

In the 18th century, it is true that, roughly from the 2nd half onwards, there was a striking increase in the speed of technical development. It offered the country new opportunities and miseries as it had never known before, and that happened only in Britain. Later, in the late 18 th and early 19th

centuries (during the wars with Napoleon, called the Napoleonic wars), England applied sweeping changes to industry and farming. England and Scotland set up the machinery that would later enable Britain to become "the workshop of the world" by the 1850's.

A lot of myths surrounded the Industrial Revolution. It is true that type of Industrial Revolution that started in Britain was to transform the whole world from many points of view (e.g. landscapes, types of society, mentalities…). This coincided with the history of Britain alone. These transformations concerning only Britain at first gave her influence and power over the whole world, and this ensured the domination of an Anglo-Saxon vision of the world, of trade, of economics, of power and of Anglo-Saxon values up to the present day. Today's global dominance by the USA, which is itself a country settled by Anglo-Saxons, is simply the continuation of this situation. (Today, the two main countries in the alliance in Iraq are Britain and the USA.) The seeds of what is called the Anglo-sphere today were planted in Britain in the 18th and 19th centuries.

We can now realize that we are paying a terrible price as a result of technical change which was first applied in the North of England in the 18th and 19th centuries. The pioneer role deeply marked the country and had caused much damage from the environmental point of view. Even if we can admire Britain for what she achieved in these days, it has to be tempered now by an awareness that what was for a long time considered as progress in fact started a chain of events leading t climate change, global warming, the greenhouse effect and all their terrible and unpredictable consequences. The pioneer role deeply marked the country. Another consequence is the damage done to the environment by the new type of farming that appeared in the 18 th century. It was the English who invented farming of the productivist kind, with intensive methods. One of the most dramatic consequences, not so long ago, was mad cow disease (=BSE). One possible question about it is: if men had known all this, would they take taken these risks?

To return to Britain alone, the title of the course concerns Britain but we are very often dealing with England alone, or with England and Scotland. Each nation in Britain had different characteristics and a different history. The word Britain is therefore slightly misleading since the situation we will study is mostly that of England and Scotland. Only by the 1850's could Wales be considered as participating in the Industrial Revolution. As far as the 3 rd semester is concerned, we must remember that Wales and Scotland, except for Edinburgh and Glasgow, were background countries, not concerned with industrial and agricultural change. They had their own problems. What happened in Britain must be compared with what happened in other countries in the rest of Europe, because their industrial revolutions generally represented a brief, temporary phase of their history. In Britain, the difference is that she had a pioneering row, and this left a deep mark on the country for a long time, especially socially, economically and politically. (For instance, in the 1960's and 1970's, Britain's economic problems and relative economic decline were attributed to the persistence of methods and structures inherited from the 19th century. Another example is the division between North and South in the UK, which is also attributed to the 19 th century events.) Even today, there is still some evidence of the scars left by the Industrial Revolution.

The consequence of all this is that one cannot claim to understand 20th century or even 21st century Britain, economically, socially, politically and culturally without knowledge of what happened in the 18th and 19th centuries. If one is not convinced of this, our study will also try to show that the working class, or rather all of us, apart from the happy few at the top of today's society, are undergoing the most brutal economic transformation the world has known since the Industrial Revolution. Very striking parallels can be drawn between the situation of these days and today's situation (with globalization for instance). We first need to study what the economic and social situation was in the mid-18th century and this will be the first chapter of semester 3.



ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SITUATION IN BRITAIN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SITUATION IN BRITAIN IN THE 1740s & 1750s IN THE 1740s & 1750s

I.I. Content and Prosperity or Defoe’s EnglandContent and Prosperity or Defoe’s England

These two words are the terms that define the situation in Britain in those days, and even earlier what has been called "Defoe's England". The early 18th century is known as Defoe's England because he died in 1731 and because, apart from novels (Robinson Crusoe, Moll Flanders…), he published many books about his travels in the British Isles. These books contain many observations about the situation in the country, and in those days there were very few such books. Therefore historians heavily rely on his works. There are very few reliable primary sources. What Defoe usually describes is a satisfied, happy and prosperous country. The same can be said about the 1740s and 50s. England also enjoyed a healthy national life. There was no separation between towns and the country or between agriculture, industry and commerce. This was one harmonious single economic system.

What could then cause disruption? Wars. But content and prosperity generally did not stop, even in wartime, because there were good harvests and cheap food. Even in this early period, the expansion in industry, agriculture and commerce meant that "society moved unconsciously towards Industrial Revolution" (cf. historian Christopher Alan Bayly's book Imperial Meridian). More and more profit and money were made in trade and it was frequently invested into the land by improving landlords1 who also played a role in industry. Therefore there was a constant interplay between towns and the country, which was fundamental to England's harmony and strength. Yet, it does not mean everything was perfect. Society was not 100% stable. For example, politically, local elites were losing power in favour of a national elite which operated through the control of Parliament, it centres the power, more than ever before. The local elite cannot longer do what they want. Another example is social conflicts (i.e. land right, control of market…) reflected in occasional food riots in the 1720s, 1730s and 1760s, with uprising lead by artisan who wanted to defends protected markets and trade practices. There was also religious and political divisions, which we will study in chapter 2. But on the whole, Defoe's England is always described as a united nation, thanks to its trade especially.

II.II. TradeTrade

The population was mainly composed of peasant and craftsman. For peasants and craftsmen, the old way of life still carried on as usual. But this does not mean there was no evolution, especially in trade. Already in the mid-18th century, traders and middlemen were finding new markets for their products. England started developing "a sophisticated marketing structure while regionalism and provincialism in the home market were breaking down" (according to Bayly in Imperial Meridian). In France, for a long time, economy was stuck in regionalism and provincialism. This was the same in other continental countries. Why was this not the case in England? Various elements explain the development of both internal and external trade in England's economy.

A. Internal trade

Middlemen2, whose number greatly increased in the mid-18th century, were the ones who were able to link supply and demand in England more and more effectively across the countryside. This unified the countryside, and it was to be further improved in the late 18th century by the use of boats and roads. But, already in the 1740s and 1750s, the link between supply and demand was helped by a considerable growth in coastal shipping3. This resulted in the production of items like Cheshire cheese, corn and coal (= bulk goods) from Newcastle, which found their way onto the London market, a huge market for internal trade.

The London market was greatly enlarged by its population growth and an increase in wealth due to the expansion of foreign trade. One of Britain's advantages was that London was the largest of all Western cities with 750,000 inhabitants (15% of the population of the country). At that time, London was twice as big as Paris. The predominance of London had transformed agriculture in the South and in the East, and commodities (= raw material such as food and fuel, i.e. mostly coal) 1 = Propriétaire terrien

2 Intermediary between a manufacturer and a consumer.

3 = Cabotage



flowed in from everywhere. Regions like Scotland and Ireland transported many products to London on Rivers and on the sea, more than on roads.

Another difference with the continent was that London was not the only centre of trade in Britain. By the mid-18th century, new centres were developing, especially on the Atlantic coast, thanks to trade with America. Bristol, Glasgow and Liverpool were developing as great ports of the Atlantic coast. They played a role in foreign trade and also developed much activity, which gave much vitality to the hinterland4.

One of the other elements about England's internal trade was the total absence of internal barriers or customs, contrary to the situation on the continent, and especially in France. The situation in England at that time can be called "internal free trade", although this expression did not exist yet. England, Wales and Scotland formed one single market for English traders. The British Isles were the most considerable area in Europe for this kind of "internal free trade". Ireland was in a special situation, since commerce there and from there was severely restricted. In spite of the Union Act with Scotland in 1707, it was difficult for Scottish traders to sell their products in England. English traders definitely dominated.

A regime of enterprise and improvement already existed in England. There was a general spirit of adventure and entrepreneurship. This was opening new markets both at home and abroad because of the absence of official obstacles and administrative hassles. Contrary to France, an overall spirit of freedom reigned.

Another factor was that commercial goals were in the mind of most people, from the simplest artisan5 to the moneyed man in the City (City with a capital C means London). This factor conditioned everything else. Even people who had little or nothing to do with trade (i.e. Daniel Defoe) expressed the idea that trade was "one of the glories of Britain", before industry and agriculture. At all levels, from local markets in villages to great fairs in cities, commercial concerns dominated the minds of producers in both cities and the countryside.

There was no official obstacle to trade, which was officially encouraged by the authorities (i.e. the Royal Society and the Society for the encouragement of arts, manufactures and commerce). Trade also got helped from the government and the Parliament.

Help from the State about internal trade can be seen in the way a major obstacle to trade was lifted. What was this major brake (= curb, obstacle)? The state of the roads was abominable. The network was very poor in the early and mid-18th century. Even Defoe described it and confirmed it was insufficient and very bad. Therefore roads were expensive to use. Later, in the 2nd half of the 18th century, Arthur Young also described it. In the mid-18th century, at many times of the year, roads were too soft for wagons and became mud. Others were paved but dated back from Roman time and were too narrow. They were not repaired because there was no official authority for this. The users of the roads did not pay for their upkeep since it was the responsibility of the parishes 6, both financially and physically, to repair and maintain the roads. But people from the parishes were only expected to do it 6 days a year without getting paid, and moreover they were not experts. They did not have the necessary materials and were not even given the necessary tools, so nothing was done. There was no control. On the whole, the best roads in the British Isles remained the Roman roads, just because they were the only ones which were paved.

As a consequence, sacks7 of heavy materials (i.e. coal, corn, hardware…) were transported on the sides of horses, because wheeled traffic would have broken or stuck in the mud. There were great holes and ruts. It took 2 days to travel from Dover to London, while nowadays it only takes about 2 hours. It took 10 days from London to Edinburgh, whereas now it takes less than one day or even half a day. Towards 1750, transporting one tonne of goods over 30 km could double the price. Therefore, economically speaking, it could not go on; something had to be done.

This situation had to change for economic progress and commercial development. The solution was a system of turnpikes8. It was a national policy since it was created and enforced through Acts of Parliament. At first it was on a small scale, concerning only the worst sections of some roads, but 4 The surrounding areas

5 Craftsmen, farmers…

6 = paroisses

7 Bags



for the first time the idea as to make the users of the roads pay for their upkeep and repairs. To run these turnpikes, turnpike trusts were established. This solution meant that England was already applying a policy of private initiative. Between nationalization or privatization, between the State and the private sector, England had already chosen private initiative two centuries before Thatcher or Blair. Turnpike trusts were in private hands although they were created by Parliament. They were given powers to build gates and toll bars9, and in return had to guarantee repairs or constructions in a certain area or along a certain highway.

Between 1700 and 1750, some 400 Road Acts were passed in Parliament. Yet, it meant that only 10 turnpikes a year were founded until 1750. By 1748, there were only 160 of them. These figures stand in contrast with those of later years. Indeed, between 1750 and 1790, 1600 Road Acts were passed. Over 530 trusts had been established by 1770. Therefore there was a considerable development in their number. Most cities were linked thanks to it, but the process took rather a long time. This is the reason why, until the 2nd half of the 18th century, river traffic was very important to transport food, fuel, timber, etc. The main rivers were the Thames, the Trent, the Mersey, the Severn, the Avon. Some parts of them had been deepened and locks10 had been built in the early 18th century. The role of river navigation would be complemented by canals.

B. Overseas trade

External11 trade was developing to such an extent that it was perhaps even greater than internal trade. This is due to England's expanding empire and colonies. In the early 18th century, England was expanding along the Atlantic coast in North America, in the Caribbean (especially in Jamaica) and in the West Indies. Commerce exploitation of these places had started in the West Indies before America, but England had nothing in Africa or in India yet. West Indies were important because sugar cane were produced there (sugar, Rhum and molasses). When England loose Northern America, it turns its attention to India, Asia and Australia the West Indies lost their importance.

One of the reasons for the expansion of foreign trade was Mercantilism, i.e. the Mercantile system. It had prevailed since the Tudors in the 15th century. This system had been reinforced by a series of Navigation Acts since the first one had been passed in 1651, 1660 and 1663. This system officially existed until 1849. One of its most important aspects was that all goods had to be transported exclusively onboard English ships, with English crews, and re-exported via English ports. Therefore this can be called protectionism. Indeed, this was a means of protecting England's trade and economy. It was a form of economic nationalism. This system instituted the monopoly of English commerce in England, protectionist tariffs, and an active role for the state as a consequence of this (= State intervention). England therefore developed private sector through the turnpike system as well as State intervention through Mercantilism and Navigation Acts.

The 17th century had seen a "commercial revolution" because of Mercantilism. In the 18th century, the Navigation Acts firmly established for the English the infamous triangular commerce. This consisted in ships leaving the British Isles, sailing to Africa loaded with cheap goods to be exchanged for slaves, who were transported and sold to the West Indies (Jamaica and other smaller islands known as the Sugar Islands). The ships returned to England loaded with sugar, rum, spices, etc.

Yet, Britain was not alone in this triangular trade. Her rivals were the Dutch, the French, the Spanish, the Portuguese (Spain and Portugal had started this system). In France, the most famous harbours for triangular trade were Bordeaux and Nantes. In Britain they were Bristol and Liverpool. Britain was one of the most eager and aggressive promoters of this trade. She even sold slaves to Spanish colonies in central and South America, after she had gained a monopoly in 1713 by signing the Asiento12 with the then declining Spanish Empire. (In 1713, Spain and Britain also signed the Utrecht Treaty, which has justified British presence in Gibraltar ever since.)

Especially the slave trade was very lucrative. Fortunes were made in Bristol and Liverpool thanks to that trade. Therefore Britain belonged to the European economy and to the worldwide economy of European maritime states.

8 Toll gates / toll bars

9 = barrières de péage

10 = écluses

11 Foreign

12 = contrat



England's commercial network extended all over the world. First, in Europe, it extended to Northern Europe and the Mediterranean. In what was called the New World, i.e. the Northern American continent, she had a monopoly over her colonies as well as in the West Indies thanks to the imperial system. For a long time, the West Indies were economically more important than the North American colonies. The network also extended to Africa, but there were no colonies there yet, only trading posts. This was the same in India and in the Far East: there were only trading posts and what the British called at that time "factories", (i.e. warehouses13).

In Britain itself, there were many sea ports. Britain's monopoly in colonial trade was ensured by the Navigation Acts. The prosperity of the sea ports was often based on slave trade. There were also shipwrights, which meant that ship owners participated in navigation and transport of goods between Africa and the colonies. They imported sugar, molasses and rum from the West Indies to Europe, and all these goods were produced thanks to slaves. Later, tobacco (from Virginia) and cotton was also imported from America to England.

Around 1750, 100,000 British slaves were onboard some 6,000 ships. A huge number of people were employed in both internal and external trade (clerks, accountants14, stevedores15, etc). Masses of goods flowed to and from the colonies. The colonies too had to buy what they needed to England and were prohibited from buying to other countries. Among other goods imported to England were tea and coffee, for which the English were acquiring a taste.

For all these reasons, according to Bayly in Imperial Meridian, "English people came to consider themselves as denizens16 of a consumer society, and national taste started to extend beyond items of clothing and food to luxuries such as tea and coffee and services such as commercial horseracing, theatre and concerts". The expression "consumer society" did not exist at that time but can now be applied to that period.

By the 18th century, England had already become "a nation of shopkeepers", which was originally an insult by Napoleon. The merchants were characteristic figures of that period and commercial aims and preoccupations were on everyone's minds. Foreign trade was just more lucrative than internal trade, but the authorities and the government were firm defenders of external trade too. How did the government help foreign trade? The government was always willing, and even eager, to conquer markets. In those days, it could be done by the military solution or by colonization. Foreign policy was dominated by these economical aims, in England at least. (On the contrary, France wanted to acquire new land by colonizing, but not necessarily for trade.) Therefore, Britain's war aims were usually purely commercial too. This was certainly influenced by the presence in London of lobbies (already at that time): industrialists17 lobbies, traders' lobbies and financers' lobbies. They often urged the government into finding new markets, just as today's lobbies do. Once a market was conquered, the English could dominate local competition (this was what happened in India in the late 18th century for example). As a whole, this behaviour was to lead to Britain's worldwide quasi-monopoly.

Another way of helping external trade was by signing treaties, which Britain often did, for instance with Russia. The government also ensured that the Royal Navy was always kept in a high state of readiness to deploy overseas wherever it was necessary and defend Britain's interests on the seas all over the world. All traders enjoyed a great, if not complete, autonomy. They were officially encouraged by the Board of Trade (= today's Minister of Trade). A good fiscal system also encouraged trade, which meant low taxes. Indeed, Britain believed that what was good for the merchant was good for the monarch as well.

England's perception of trade was different from other countries'. She considered low taxes on masses of products better than high taxes of very few goods (which few people would thus have been able to buy).

Finally, foreigners who studied the situation in England or simply visited the country all admired both Britain's internal and external trade and the freedom enjoyed by merchants. They saw this commercial freedom as having pervaded18 the whole of English society, they saw it as having

13 = entrepôts

14 = comptables

15 = dockers

16 = habitants, membres

17 = industriels, N

18 = se diffuser sur, proliférer dans



resulted in greater political freedom and as the symbol of a healthy society. Voltaire often had to escape to England and live there as an exile because of his problems with the French monarchy, therefore he had a chance to observe the interplay between commercial freedom and political liberty. He wrote about it, and exclaimed in Lettres philosophiques (1734): "Le commerce, qui a enrichi les citoyens en Angleterre, a contribué à les rendre libres, et cette liberté a étendu le commerce à son tour [= cercle vertueux]; de là s'est transformée la grandeur de l'Etat." Another philosopher who wrote about England was Montesquieu, but it was later.

* TRANSITION *

The development of both internal and external trade represented a huge accumulation of capital19. Both individuals and companies needed to conduct business through banks and through a financial system in order to be able to make investments and obtain loans. In the case of chartered companies, huge fleets of ships were involved. They belonged for example to the East India company (a chartered company), which also had to maintain trading posts, pay their staffs at home and abroad, the ships' crews and their own armies in several colonies. For instance, they provided weapons and guns, doctors, etc. A royal charter was given by the King to the chartered companies, which was a permission for them to colonize and exploit an overseas territory. For example, Virginia and Pennsylvania were founded under a chartered company. The company had a monopoly over the territory and managed it on the King's name.

III.III.Financial and banking systemFinancial and banking system

An important financial and banking system already existed in Britain in the 18th century.

A. Financial system

It had some notable characteristics, such as the existence of joint-stock companies20. These companies enabled the big aristocratic landlords to meet and work with financiers in London because they all belonged to the Board of Directors21 of these companies. Not all landlords wanted to engage in trade, but these boards meant that they could work, in their own interest and also for the benefit of the country's economy, with the businessmen of London. Landlords who had wealth and political power could work together with people who had a business experience. In London, the City was already a big financial centre.

B. Banking system

Banks had been founded not only in London, but also in provincial towns and in most major cities and ports. Banks were important for investors, who could thus get loans and borrow money to invest it. Would-be investors could therefore find money in a relatively easy way, which in an important factor to explain the future Industrial Revolution. However, too much had been made of the banking system by some historians: there were problems too about it. Many banks were too small (the business of one man or one family), many went bankrupt (= there were bankruptcies), there were frauds, etc. Many would-be investors in fact did not resort to banks but to self-financing instead. So the role of banks in the economy has to be put and kept into perspective.

What remains true is that, thanks to the financial system, England was able to resist enemies (especially France) and to support and finance its allies (especially in the Napoleonic wars). The financial system, thanks to domestic and foreign trade, kept improving.

IV.IV.AgricultureAgriculture

"The change between 1700 and 1800 was astonishing. England not only produced food for a population that had doubled itself as well as grain for treble [= three times] the number of horses, but, during the first part of the period [the 18th century], became the granary of Europe." (Cf. Lord Ernle, a historian, in English farming, past and present and also on http://www.soilandhealth.org/01aglibrary/010136ernle/010136ch7.htm) Yet, this view is challenged by other historians.

What is also remarkable is that, already around 1750, agriculture no longer dominated the economy, contrary to other economies in other countries. This is a paradox. By 1780, agriculture

19 = capitaux

20 = sociétés par actions

21 = conseil d'administration


http://www.soilandhealth.org/01aglibrary/010136ernle/010136ch7.htm


accounted for only 30% of the national income. By the end of the 18th century, agriculture employed only 1/3 of the working population, as opposed to 70 to 80% at the beginning. These figures need explaining. At the same time, over 75% of the total population still lived in the countryside. Agriculture was still vital for three reasons:

In 1750, only two cities (London and Edinburgh) had over 50,000 inhabitants.

Agriculture was still the indispensable basis for other activities, especially for trade, because agriculture was the only permanent source of food. Indeed, food imports could not be regular at that time, and they could not be cheap enough. This situation lasted until the 1870s or 1880s. The reasons for it were wars, shipwrecks, the high cost of transport (especially in mainland England), etc. As a result, British agriculture just had to feed the British population.

Political and social life of the country, i.e. Parliament and the whole structure of society, was dominated by land owners, landlords, aristocrats, or simply wealthy people who had bought land and whose fortune and way of life depended, either totally or mostly, on agriculture. To belong to the upper classes and enter politics, one needed to own land. Land ownership almost automatically gave a seat in Parliament, and it was a matter of social prestige and political power. In Parliament itself, small villages and rural counties had more weight than some large cities, because the situation in Parliament had not changed since the Middle Ages. Until the 19th century, laws favouring landlords and their interests were passed to the detriment of industrials and other activities. This situation did not really change until 1832.

Another reason for the predominance of agriculture was that the elite's lifestyle (especially sports and past times), opinions and philosophy were turned towards the countryside. Those who wanted to enter the high society circles had to imitate them. This perpetuated the land-owning class and way of life. Any change affecting the countryside was automatically reflected in political life, and therefore affected as well the whole social structure itself.

The organization of the society in those days was the following:

The monarch.

A few hundred very rich aristocratic landlords such as dukes, i.e. high nobility.

A larger number of members of the gentry, and especially squires. (High nobility and the gentry owned half the land in England. A great part of the other half belonged to the monarch.)

The land nobles and the gentry owned was usually leased out22 to some tens of thousands of people known as farmers. (The word "farmers" in English at that time is very different from the French word "fermiers": this was a very enviable position.) This system of leasing out the land is also referred to as "landlord-tenant" system in history books.

The farmers worked the land with the help of numerous labourers23, cottagers and servants. Sometimes these people owned a very small patch (=plot) of land themselves, but only a few cottagers and freeholders24 were able to survive and have their own lodgings.

One of the question in why? Social prestige, political power not only.

Another reason as a social class many land lords were quite willing to devote both attention and money to improving the land and method of cultivation. So did so out of curiosity in a spirit of scientific discovery at any value at 1st, but when the other saw that a profit could be made this became the main motivation.

What is interesting from that point of view is that the money acquired in financial system by land lords was often reinvested in agriculture but also could be in industry or trade.

One of the cause of what is known as the agriculture revolution.

Usually agriculture is associated with archaic methods but in 18 th century England was society already adapted to produce cheaper and better goods and another preoccupation was marketing and selling on national and international scale.

The movement toward increasing fields movement of increasing productivism took one or two other century to settle in the agricultural revolution has already started before 1750 and made possible 1st to improve technique and commercial methods and secondly thank to legal measures.

22 = données à bail

23 = journaliers

24 = propriétaires fonciers sans obligations



A. Before 1750

On of the chief measure was known as the enclosure movement. This was a movement that allowed the regrouping and concentration of land and historians tell us that the enclosure of land has been going on since Tudor time (1485-1603) among this form there was:

The enclosure of open fields into hedged fields to promote better individual farming,

The enclosure of village commons (part of land common of all villagers everyone can use it)

The enclosure of arable land for pasture especially for sheep.

One of the problem with open field was that lead to quarrel between neighbours, and also to irregular farming.

Until of the 18th century a part of that form they had provoke little resentment and they were always presented as a economic necessity or event in the early 18th century as a duty.

The population increase they have to be fed but land were potentially the best were still unenclosed and therefore cultivated with archaic practices of cultivation (e.g. fallowing land)

Fallowing land25 was the main method of cultivation.

The idea of agricultural improvement has been in the air since the Restoration (1660-1688.) With an increasing number of books on better methods ands spirit of scientific progress.

Name associated with agricultural improvement:

Jethro Tull

Lord Townshend known as Turnip Townshend

Arthur Young

Thomas Coke who found land in Norfolk and because he succeeded, he became Coke of Norfolk.

Collings Brothers

Their role is now disputed by serious historians who are not agree these men would be myth.

In the 1st half of the 18th century e.g. Jethro Tull bar have often been described as one of the 1 st

scientific farmer and claims that he had invented two important tools:

The seed drill

The horse hoe

This in fact is a false claim in particular he didn’t invented the seed drill.

Lord Engle had opposite opinions: He considered them (Tull) as pioneers.

Overton: “despite the evidence, the myth associated with these individuals are proved extremely different dislodge.”

It doesn’t mean most of them weren’t successful or admirable in what they achieved. From our point of view, we must be careful and compare what historian wrote about them. Even if part of their success is a myth, we must know what each of them did or tried to do.

Overton himself wrote: “There’s general agreement that their role has been exaggerated.” But they did something anyway.

Some landlords, certainly not many at the beginning were on the lookout for new methods. Enclosure was seen as an opportunity for experiment and change. They were encouraged by modern method theorist and agricultural writers, collectively known as agriculturalists, who denounced ancient methods and commons as economically harmful to everyone. Denounced open fields because they accused this system of delaying the adoption of improvement, which (some) in fact had been known since 17th century. E.g. old method of fallowing, different scientific rotation of crops; cultivation of turnips and potatoes (since 17th century: known), use of silos, storage of water,

25 = jachère



proper feeding of stock in winter, use of oil-cake26. Why weren’t these improvements used? Because it was a question of routines (cf. all habits dies hard.)

When ideas of men like Tull appeared, much of the England land still belonged to the small squires and other small owners (who weren’t interested or didn’t have the necessary capital.) until 1740’s, al improvements (especially enclosure) had been enforced at a local level. E.g. only 67 enclosure acts were voted form 1721 to 1740.

What happened in the 1740’s, considered by most as the benefits of the agricultural revolution, was in a way what happened with turnpike post = acceleration. Became a national policy since it was to be reinforced by a new procedure, with a new type of act of parliament to overcome the resistance of individual owners. It was the will of the parliament with the benefit of hindsight, I can see that in most cases, the way enclosure was carried out, was scandalous. The very big land owners controlled parliament. Many small owners were cheated out of their best lands. They had to be content with the little money or bad land that was given in compensation by corrupted parliamentary commissioners. The decision of the commissioners couldn’t be challenged. The pace of enclosure increased with each decade. Between 1741 and 1760, over 200 enclosure acts were voted. This movement continued after 1760, until 1830’s and 1840’s and had serious social consequences. Hundred of thousand of acres were to be enclosed, but some of the socio-economical consequences in the late 18th century. Another young= considered as a sincere agriculturalist.

Agricultural industry explains why (cf. Trevelyan) “great compact estates cultivated by tenants and landless labourers covered more and more of England at the expense of the other forms of cultivation and ownership.” Agricultural revolution plus enclosure had one result on the English landscape: the landscape that so many think is typical of the eternals England, with its chessboard pattern, dates back to no further than 18th and 19th centuries

V.V. Industry:Industry:

One of the goal is to show that, even before Industrial revolution, first regional specialization already existed, and secondly the Industrial world in England wasn’t a desert (Industry was already represented by different activities. E.g. coalmining, the iron industry, manufactured goods.) E.g. millions of tons of cal were produces.

A. Coal mining:

This figure represented astronomical quantities for those days. The methods used were very simple, even archaic. There were all sort of mining: iron, copper, tin, led, zinc. Coal was just one form of mining, but it was already the typical activity in different areas; in and around Newcastle, Dunham, in the county of Northumberland. It was already one major industrial section in counties like Staffordshire an Leicestershire. From the point of view of technology, machines used in coal mining had already been invented and machines depending on coal too. Denis Papin, inventor of steam engine, had to flee from France because of his invention and died around 1712 in London.

In 1705, two very famous men in England (Thomas Savery and Thomas Newcomen) also invented steam engine used for the first time in 1712. In the following years: was used to solve a very serious problem in mines: pimping water out (problem of flooding.) This allowed mines, shafts, galleries to be dug deeper and deeper.

In parallel with these technological advances, the demand for coal had been increasing since 17 th

century, not for industry but for domestic use (heating.) Coal had became the regular domestic fuel in London for example and in all the regions to which it could be transported by water. In fact a historian (J.H. Plumb), in a paperback England in the 18th century says: “The demand for coal was too great in the early 18th century that it’s almost possible to peak of a coal rush.”

Apart from being used as fuel, coal was used in many industrial processes of manufacture. The great demand that there was meant that shafts were sunk very deep, sometimes to 130 meters or more. The demand also resulted in a great number of people and horses being employed. For example, near Newcastle, to transport coal, over 20,000 horses were employed in the mines (this was before the use of wagons became common). There was still a great amount of surface mining, as opposed to shafts, and there were also many small businesses with only two or three minors, sometimes even just one.

26 = tourteau



B. Iron

With regard to British iron, it had been considered as one of the best in Europe, if not the best, since the 17th century. This industry had grown rapidly, especially in Birmingham and the area around it, which was called the Black Country. One problem was that coal or coke fires were not yet applied. Using coke is a process which greatly improves the quality of iron, and it had in fact been discovered by Abraham Darby between 1709 and 1713, but it was not used in smelting works27 until 1734 to 1750. Even then, coke was not in general use.

Compared with today's iron, 18th-century iron was not of excellent quality; it was expensive to produce and transport because there was a real problem in iron transporting. In 1720, 50,000 tons were produced, and even at the end of the 18th century only 100,000 tons were produced. So this industry needed greater improvements.

The main markets for the iron industry were military needs (to make guns, cannons, cannon balls, swords, etc.) and agriculture (to make tools, wheels, ploughs, horse shoes, etc.). It was not yet the time for the famous Coal and Iron Revolution, which was to come especially after 1830 with the development of railways and the Age of Coal and Iron.

C. Other manufactured goods

As for other manufactured goods, certain towns and counties had already specialized in certain activities. For example, Sheffield was specialized in cutlery, Birmingham in light and small industries and especially light metallurgy, and Staffordshire in potteries (the area was later called the Potteries in the 19th century).

One needs to insist on one sector which was to be, during the Industrial Revolution, the leading sector if taken as a whole: the textile industries. The major difference between the Industrial Revolution and the years we are now considering (until the mid-18th century) is that wool dominated this sector in the 18th century, whereas later it was cotton. The woollen cloth around 1750 was still the chief item in home and foreign trade.

It was a long-time renowned sector, dating back to the Middle Ages. Many rivals had been eliminated and it was still the greatest and by far the most widely diffused national industry in 1750. It was for instance the favourite of Parliament, which had thus instituted a complex code of laws protecting and encouraging it against the export of raw wool and the import of foreign cloth. Two thirds of English exports consisted of cloth. Many other domestic laws and measures, not only in economy but also in foreign policy, were aimed at promoting its manufacture and pushing its sales abroad. The utmost was done to keep the great wool markets open. The markets for English wool were western Europe, the Mediterranean, Russia, South America and the American colonies.

There were specialized centres which dated back to the Middle Ages, although wool was produced almost everywhere in the country: East Anglia (around Norwich), the west and the south-west (in and around Bristol), and Yorkshire (in and around Leeds, Bradford, Halifax and York). London was in itself a great industrial centre, famous for its production of luxury goods. In textiles, silk was very luxurious and was produced especially in Spitalfields, an area around London.

This was the situation around 1750. During later years of the 18th century, some of these sectors were to thrive28 while others went through very difficult times, but in the end they survived and developed while others declined irremediably and disappeared completely, especially when cotton replaced and dominated everything else. With the exception of London, most of the centres mentioned were not large towns at all. The bigger cities had more traditional British industries.

In those days, it was artificial to separate industry and rural or agricultural activities, even in the coal and iron industries, because, in 1750 and even until the early 19th century, a large part of manufacturing was a function of the country life. For long, industry was to remain rural and was known as a "cottage industry"29, which was the most representative part of industry. Working in factories was not very common yet, and this situation dated back to the Middle Ages.

Yet, what was new in the 18th century was that many artisans, i.e. cottage workers, had specialized in one production or another (e.g. woollen cloth, cotton fabric, silk material, linen, carpet-making or hosiery30). There was also specialization in other areas like metal goods or even coal mining.

27 = fonderies

28 = prospérer

29 = travail artisanal à domicile



Many of these workers were no longer independent or self-employed, but were becoming wage-earners. In many villages, workers wove or knit on their frames, or traditionally went coal-mining during their spare time or in the off-season, and these villages were becoming industrial villages inhabited by skilled, and even highly skilled workers.

So, even in the early 18th century, the situation was complex in industry and one should not oversimplify the description of this situation. To understand the whole range of situations which then existed, we can say that in some parts of England, especially in the woollen industry, independent artisans travelled and sold themselves on the markets the goods they had produced: there was no middleman. They produced goods with their family and/or labourers they employed. In other parts of the country, merchants and middlemen travelled to villages to buy finished or semi-finished goods from independent artisans. Yet, in other areas, especially in Yorkshire for wool and in Lancashire for cotton, the goods were more and more often produced by semi-independent artisans. In some cases, they might still own their workshops, frames or looms. But they were not totally independent because they received the raw material from merchants and depended on them for their supplies. This is called the putting-out system31, and this expression is still used today. This system had not generalized to the whole country but it was developing.

There were other cases, especially in the south-west of England in the woollen industry, and also in Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire among hosiers, where the wage-earners worked in premises32 with tools that were owned by one big merchant employer or "manufacturer". He also provided the raw material, so that the wage-earners totally depended on him. Sometimes, especially in the south-west, they depended on him even for their homes.

At that time, the situation was quite different from the time when it was exclusively the villagers' and cottagers' wives who spun and wove the raw material, produced by their own sheep, for their own needs or possibly the needs of people living in the same village. This could still exist in some areas, but such an archaic system could not prevail for long in the 18th century and its days were practically over. Each village and region was gradually specializing in one type of manufacture, so that, more and more often, self-sufficiency33 no longer applied and was no longer sustainable. All the villages needed to import from other parts of England the goods they no longer produced. Workers were too busy producing wool and had no time to produce their own food, so they had to import it, and vice versa in other areas. This was one of the reasons for the development of internal trade as well.

Most historians underline that the shift from self-sufficiency to a more modern structure was fairly rapid. For instance, when George II acceded to the throne in 1727, the word "manufacturer" did not describe a capitalist employer and owner of a factory but the hand worker himself in his small workshop. Then, it came to describe the people who managed various workshops that could be scattered over a wide area (these people were often merchant employers). This represented some form of capitalist organization and supervision, but it was a far cry from the type of capitalist concentration that was to appear in the rest of the 18th century and in the 19th century (the development of factories, the concentration of the means of production and of the labour force).

Now let us focus on the obstacles to this type of capitalist concentration in the 18th century. During the first part of the century, no technical invention really opened the way to that sort of concentration. In fact, it was quite the opposite. The techniques used by a majority of workers went against this evolution. For example, in the textile industry, the first modernized and "mechanized" means of production were in fact small devices which should not even be called machines. They could be used even in the smallest cottage. Another example were the metal industries. Coke had been discovered but, despite this discovery, charcoal34 was still in use, and the problem with it was that it could not be effectively transported because it was very brittle35. So the smelting works36

that used charcoal and the ironworks37 were small and scattered in forests and along streams.

30 = bonneterie

31 = sous-traitance

32 workshops, locaux

33 = auto-suffisance, autarcie

34 = charbon de bois

35 = friable

36 = fonderies



These were obstacles to the sort of concentration that was to exist in the very late 18th century and in the 19th century, when the Industrial Revolution started. The only forms of capitalist concentration existing in industry in the mid-18th century were mainly commercial and financial, i.e. money was concentrated in the hands of a few industrialists.

New processes, which were so important in the following years, had appeared before 1750, but at the time, they were first shrouded in secrecy because any invention that could result in the loss of jobs was rejected by artisans and craftsmen, or simply by angry workers. This was possible because they were organized in powerful guilds which dated back to the Middle Ages, especially in old industries such as the woollen industry.

Another obstacle to the development of inventions were protectionist measures against foreign inventions.

We can now focus on the social structure in industry and industrial categories or classes. We must notice that the word "class" was not used at that time with the same meaning as it has today. Wages could be paid in cash, but there also existed the truck system38. Instead of being given money in exchange for his labour, a worker was given some of the goods he had produced. So he had to sell those goods himself if he wanted money. The problem was that the goods he was given were often of poor quality, so they were difficult to sell. This system led to rioting.

This is why the social structure is so difficult to determine. Prices and wages varied from one region to another. Women and children could be employed in their family workshops, under vastly different conditions from one region and one family to another. A relatively large number of artisans also worked on farms. One aristocratic landlord could own himself all the mines or all the ores in one county.

1. The social hierarchy of industrial classes

At the top of it was the rich urban upper-class made up of merchants and middlemen.

Just below them were the master artisans or craftsmen, who lived either in town or in the countryside. They belonged to what was called the "middling sort". (The expression "social class" did not exist at that time, although the notion did, and words such as rank, situation or estate were used to refer to one's class.) The members of this category were relatively independent, contrary to other artisans depending entirely on merchants and what they called their masters.

Below them were the journeymen.

At the bottom were the young, i.e. the apprentices. Apprentices had to learn their trade for seven years. Young children lived with a master and after seven years they could become themselves artisans and set up in business.

The worst-off category was constituted by the minors. Most of them lived in the countryside. As new technologies developed, pits were deeper and deeper, which involved that minors spent more and more time underground and were more and more segregated from other Englishmen. They were literally invisible and this is why it took so long to improve their lot. The first improvements only came around the 1840s. There were more and more accidents and explosions, and very often, as in other industries, women and children were employed as bearers to carry the coal in the galleries with horses.

In the mining districts of Durham and Northumberland, minors formed combinations to protest about their working conditions, but even if they were thousands, they were unable to better their conditions. In Scotland, the situation was even worse as minors were in the same condition as peasants in the Middle Ages, i.e. they were reduced to the condition of bondmen39. This means that they were legally obliged to work as minors for the duration of their lives and they belonged to their employer.

Even before the heyday of capitalism, i.e. the 19th century, which is always described as the most evil century in respect of the workers' condition, the living conditions of many workers were deplorable. Another characteristic which already existed before the 19th century and which is often described as typical of the 19th century was that the minors' employers had very little contact with

37 = forges

38 = système de troc

39 = serfs



their employees. Within the coal-mining industry, there was a complete barrier between the employer and the manual worker, which announced the situation in the late 18th century and in the 19th century.

2. General conclusion

By the 1750s, England and Britain had a large number of major assets40, among which could be found a prosperous and thriving trade, in parallel with a growing colonial empire (which had very bright prospects and literally no limit to its growth), a powerful navy, improving marketing and banking structures, an improving agriculture, commercially-minded elites, a large capital city, a renowned woollen industry, etc.

On the other hand, if we concentrate on industry, workers were more and more specialized but a lot of them were still employed in agriculture at the same time. In industry, this was a disadvantage because it meant breaks in output according to the season, and also the fact that the goods produced were of poor quality. From the point of view of efficiency, there were too many scattered workshops in which whole families were employed, which caused a break on technical innovation and industrial expansion. Another break was caused by the state of the roads and the poor transportation network.

Yet the scattering of industries had one important advantage. Land owners, who belonged to the agricultural world, also owned the mines on their estates and the workshops in the villages. Therefore it was in their interest to invest money in the construction of railroads and canals, so that the carriage of farm products and also coal and industrial goods could be made easier. But better roads and new canals only appeared mostly after 1750. Until then, the economic situation, and especially production under the domestic system, was only adapted to a rural society and a relatively stagnant population.

40 = avantages



THE POPULATION AND SOCIETY – THE SPIRIT OF THETHE POPULATION AND SOCIETY – THE SPIRIT OF THE AGEAGE

I.I. The population – demographyThe population – demography

Evidence concerning the population is unreliable. The first official census dates back to 1801. Even births, marriages and deaths were not officially recorded at a national level until 1837. There were only estimates.

Most estimates for England and Wales mention 6 or 6.5 million inhabitants between 1740 and 1750. For England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland there were about 10.5 million inhabitants. The growth in population had been slow between 1690 and the 1720s. After that, there was demographic stagnation and even decrease until the 1740s. Afterwards, especially after 1760, there was a marked increase in the population. We can then wonder if Industrial Revolution was the cause or the consequence of this population growth, but this will be treated during the fourth semester.

This population was unevenly distributed. Large parts of the British Isles were practically deserted, especially in Wales and Scotland.

II.II. Society – rural society, urban societySociety – rural society, urban society

The social system in Britain was not the same as on the continent. Especially since the 17th century, it was wealth and not birth that differentiated social categories. In theory, Common Law did not favour one social category more than another. The social hierarchy reflected the hierarchy of incomes. Land ownership was considered to be more prestigious than simply money.

The society was predominantly rural and ruled by the aristocracy. The elite of aristocrats and businessmen was more powerful than on the continent because it was not tightly controlled by the sovereign. No one protested against its domination, whether in the British Isles or on the continent. The elite was called their "betters" by the people who were below them in the social ladder. There was no revolt against the social hierarchy, and obedience and deference as well as a sense of order prevailed. At every level of society, people accepted patronage and nepotism.

This acceptance was a characteristic of England. Foreign visitors were always struck by it. It was probably due in part to undeniable upward mobility. Quite a few people managed to climb up the social ladder, even if they were of humble origins, Irish, a West Indian planter, or if they had made a fortune in India for instance. Newcomers were absorbed by the elite and into the great families of the land.

However, newcomers did not swamp the existing social and political establishment because they were not numerous enough to really change the social structure. They were assimilated by older institutions and professions1 thanks to the latter's control of Parliament and their intelligence and ability to absorb newcomers. The upper-classes in Britain have always been known for their ability to absorb newcomers, so there was no barrier between social classes. The social situation in England explains why, by the 1750s and 1760s, there was a clear vision of the national interest among many ranks of society. As for the old antagonisms between the landed classes and the moneyed classes, they were forgotten and overridden by the national interest. The ruling classes in England were varied but no cleavage really separated aristocracy and the bourgeoisie, both aware of their common interests.

Yet, the domination of big land owners was maintained for a long time, i.e. until the 1830s at least or even longer, and rural society was the basis of English society as a whole. This was due to prejudice towards big land owners which accorded great importance to land owning, and it was also due to the great importance of patronage (= protection of somebody in a lower social position by the upper landed classes).

Over this rural world, in villages and parishes, two very important figures ruled: the squire and the parson. They can be considered literally as "local sovereigns", especially in the north of England, where the Industrial Revolution took place and developed. The squire had three functions:

He was the local representative of the King.

1 = professions libérales



He was also the local Justice of Peace (=JP), i.e. the first local magistrate.

He represented the only form of local administration at the time.

Indeed, local administration in those days was left to the initiative of the squire. For instance, he was in charge of maintaining roads, bridges and local sanitary services, he supervised almshouses and workhouses (which were not actually places where poor people worked but where they had to live and also work). Local administration was very chaotic and only depended on the seriousness of the squire. There was no central administration and little control from London. The squire and the parson also had a considerable moral influence as they could give encouragement, punishment, etc. Squires literally controlled the lives of poor people.

On the other hand, there was an urban society made up of: essentially the "middling sort" (shopkeepers, doctors, lawyers, clerks, artisans and craftsmen) and the mass of labouring classes (including apprentices) with no stable employment, together with (at the top) upper merchants, or "merchants princes", ship-owners, bankers and financiers.

But one should not contrast urban society with rural society because many people worked both in industry and agriculture. As for members of the nobility, they spent their time in cities in the winter but also on their estate in the countryside in the summer. They owned land both in urban centres and in the countryside, therefore they were both members of the urban and the rural society. Merchants belonged to the urban society, but bought estates in the countryside. More and more often, especially in the textile industry, they controlled workers in the countryside. Their sons married daughters from aristocratic families. But this interplay did not concern only classes at the top of society. Among the labouring classes, there was a constant flow of people moving from the countryside to the cities, especially when times got hard and living conditions were too bad in the countryside for rural workers.

III.III.Freedom and cultureFreedom and culture

Culturally speaking, there was little difference between dwellers and country people, whether it be at the top and at the bottom of the social ladder. The manners of the elite resembled those of peasants or those existing when the King was Henry VIII, especially table manners. English people still ate with their fingers for example, which would have been unacceptable at the court of Louis XIV. The spirit of the age was one of great intellectual and cultural excellence in England, which was also known as a country of freedom.

Indeed, England was admired by foreigners (Voltaire, Montesquieu in his Esprit des Lois (1748), to name but two) because of its institutions and civil liberties. English subjects supposedly enjoyed a relative freedom. However, this idyllic view should be put into perspective and foreigners' descriptions must be qualified by the term "supposedly". Common people and poor people were despised and considered by the elite and the intellectuals as evil, dangerous, deprived, incapable and vice-ridden. In return, they often had to resort to violence, rioting, etc. According to J. H. Plumb (England in the Eighteenth Century, p. 13), they resorted to "[…] burning, looting [pillage], and destruction by the mob were commonplaces of life". These acts were very violently repressed. The upper-classes were so scared of the mob that laws became more and more cruel and repressive. For instance, by the end of the 18th century, a child could be hanged just for stealing a handkerchief.

If compared to other monarchies, England's monarchy became a limited constitutional monarchy after the Glorious Revolution (1688) ("the only one in the world", cf. J. H. Plumb, op. cit., p. 50). Indeed, principles of a democratic form already existed in England, and nowhere else.

Along the freedoms an Englishman enjoyed was the freedom to disobey an unlawful order for example. This, of course, implied that he had to prove in court that the official order was illegal afterwards. Therefore, English monarchy was not based on divine right as in France for instance. Other freedoms were the freedom of speech, of printing, and to a certain extent of the press. Louis XIV's 1655 declaration "L'Etat, c'est moi" before the French Parliament was a proof of absolutism and would have been unthinkable in 18th-century England.

The only freedom which was not guaranteed was that of conscience. There was generally more tolerance in England than on the continent, except towards Catholics. Until 1829, Catholics, then called "Papists", suffered from discrimination and could not obtain official posts in the administration. Freedom of worship was granted to Dissenters (= Protestants) in the Toleration Act of 1689 but not to Unitarians (until 1844) and Catholics. "Dissenters" were in fact the former "Puritans" (e.g. Cromwell), today's "Non-conformists".



In England, there was the Church of England ruled by the King on the one hand, and Protestant sects on the other: the Presbyterians, Congregationists, Independents, Baptists, Anabaptists, Quakers and, later in the 18th century, the Methodists (with John Wesley). These religious minorities played an important role, that of spreading the spirit of freedom.



AnnexAnnex

I.I. Historians & Writers:Historians & Writers:

A. Daniel Defoe (1660-1731):

Daniel Defoe, the son of a butcher, was born in London in 1660. He attended Morton's Academy, a school for Dissenters at Newington Green with the intention of becoming a minister, but he changed his mind and became a hosiery merchant instead.

In 1688 Defoe took part in the Monmouth Rebellion and joined William III and his advancing army. Defoe became popular with the king after the publication of his poem, The True Born Englishman (1701). The poem attacked those who were prejudiced against having a king of foreign birth.

The publication of Defoe's The Shortest Way with the Dissenters (1702) upset a large number of powerful people. In the pamphlet, Defoe, a Dissenter, ironically demanded the savage suppression of dissent. The pamphlet was judged to be critical of the Anglican Church and Defoe was fined, put in the Charing Cross Pillory and then sent to Newgate Prison.

In 1703 Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, a Tory government official, employed Defoe as a spy. With the support of the government, Defoe started the newspaper, The Review. Published between 1704 and 1713, the newspaper appeared three times a week. As well as carrying commercial advertising The Review reported on political and social issues. Defoe also wrote several pamphlets for Harley attacking the political opposition. The Whigs took Defoe court and this resulted in him serving another prison sentence.

In 1719 Defoe turned to writing fiction. His novels include: Robinson Crusoe (1719), Captain Singleton (1720), Journal of the Plague Year (1722), Captain Jack (1722), Moll Flanders (1722) and Roxanda (1724).

Defoe also wrote a three volume travel book, Tour Through the Whole Island of Great Britain (1724-27) that provided a vivid first-hand account of the state of the country. Other non-fiction books include The Complete English Tradesman (1726) and London the Most Flourishing City in the Universe (1728). Defoe published over 560 books and pamphlets and is considered to be the founder of British journalism. Daniel Defoe died in 1731.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jdefoe.htm

B. Christopher Alan Bayly (19**-20**):

British historian.

Professor Sir Christopher Alan Bayly is a British historian specializing in Indian, British Imperial, and Global History. He is currently the Vere Harmsworth Professor of Imperial and Naval History at the University of Cambridge. He was knighted in the Queen's Birthday Honours List of 2007 for his services to History. Upon being informed of the award he stated: "I regard this not only as a great personal honour but, as an historian of India, as recognition of the growing importance of the history of the non-western world."

He is married to Dr Susan Bayly a lecturer in social anthropology at the University of Cambridge. He is liked and admired by his doctoral students for the time and patience which he devotes to their work, and to his painstaking and constructive criticisms on their submitted work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Alan_Bayly

C. G.M. Trevelyan (1876-1962):

English historian.

George Macaulay Trevelyan, the son of the Liberal politician, George Otto Trevelyan, was born in Stratford-on-Avon in 1876. After being educated at Harrow and Trinity College, Cambridge, he taught modern history. His early books included Giribaldi (1907) and John Bright (1913).

Although his older brother, Charles Trevelyan, resigned from Asquith's government in protest at Britain's involvement in the First World War, George served in the British Army.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Alan_Bayly

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jdefoe.htm


After the war, Trevelyan became regius professor of modern history at Cambridge University. His books include British History in the Nineteenth Century (1922), History of England (1926), George Otto Trevelyan (1932) and English Social History (1944). George Macaulay Trevelyan died in 1962.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jtrevelyan.htm

D. J.H. Plumb:

British Historian

He is seen as mentor to a school of historians, having in common a wish to write accessible, broad-based work for the public: a generation of scholars that includes Roy Porter, Simon Schama, Linda Colley, David Cannadine and others, who came to prominence in the 1990s. He was champion of a 'social history' in a wide sense; he backed this up with a connoisseur's knowledge of some fields of the fine arts, such as Flemish painting and porcelain. This approach rubbed off on those he influenced, while he clashed unrepentantly with other historians (notably Cambridge colleague Geoffrey Elton, with a perspective from constitutional history) whose emphasis was on more traditional scholarship.

He was born in Leicester and educated at Alderman Newton's Grammar School, University College, Leicester and then Christ's College, Cambridge. His doctorate (1936) was supervised by G. M. Trevelyan; this was the unique occasion when Trevelyan accepted a student. He had a research fellowship at King's College, Cambridge just before World War II, during which he was at Bletchley Park where he headed a section working on a German Naval hand cipher, Reservehandverfahren.

He became a Fellow of Christ's College in 1946, remaining there. He was Master of the college from 1978 to 1982. He became Professor of Modern English History in the University in 1966. He was knighted in 1982.

In the 1960s he branched out as an editor, notably of The History of Human Society series. Later he worked on a television series about the British Royal family and the royal collections.

Friends from his early life, C. P. Snow and William Cooper, portrayed him in novels; he also is known to be the model for a character in an Angus Wilson short story, The Wrong Set.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.H._Plumb

E. Overton:

(à completer)

F. Lord Engle

(à completer)

II.II. InventorsInventors

A. Arthur Young (1741-1820):

Essayist, Pioneer of Scientific Farming

Arthur Young was a tireless propagandist for agricultural improvement and sent most of his life travelling in England, Wales, Ireland and France, observing agricultural methods and arguing for scientific improvement.

He was widely regarded by his contemporaries as the leading agricultural writer of the time. Born in London, he was the youngest child of the Suffolk gentry landowners Anne and the Reverend Arthur. Young was educated at Lavenham Grammar School, and after abortive attempts to become a merchant and then army officer, in 1763 took a farm on his mother's estate at Bradfield, although he had little knowledge of farming. Nevertheless he conducted a variety of agricultural experiments and continued his early interest in writing by publishing his first major agricultural work, The Farmer's Letters, in 1767. Young's subsequent output was prolific. Most famous are his Tours of England, Ireland and France, which mixed travel diaries with facts, figures and critical commentary on farming practices. In 1784 he founded the periodical Annals of Agriculture, and edited the forty-six volumes published as well as contributing a large proportion of their content. Young was somewhat controversially appointed Secretary of the Board of Agriculture (a state-sponsored body promoting improved farming standards) in 1793, a position he held until his death. He also wrote six of the Board's surveys of English counties.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.H._Plumb

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jtrevelyan.htm


Young was a vigorous advocate of agrarian improvements, especially enclosures and long leases, and his statistics and lively prose must have helped publicize and diffuse the innovations in farming practices that were taking place. He was consulted by agriculturists and politicians at home and abroad, including George Washington, and received numerous honors. His marriage to Martha Allen from 1765 was unhappy, though, with faults seemingly on both sides. The youngest of the couple's four children died in 1797, triggering the melancholia and religious fervor that characterised Young in his later years. His prodigious work rate slowed after about 1805 on account of deteriorating vision, and ultimately blindness.

Some contemporary rivals, notably William Marshall, were fiercely critical of Young's abilities as a farmer and accurate observer: the judgment of historians remains divided. Young certainly never made a financial success of farming, but this was partly because he expended large sums on agricultural experiments and was frequently absent from his farm writing or travelling. Allegations that Young's enquiries were based on alehouse gossip, or conducted too hastily, are perhaps not without some truth, but his sample survey investigative procedure undoubtedly represented a pioneering scientific approach to agricultural research. Ironically, historians' analysis of Youngs facts and figures has produced results that do not always support his original conclusions. For example, enclosures turn out to be not as important in increasing farm output as Young maintained.

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/stead.young

http://www.litencyc.com/php/speople.php?rec=true&UID=4839

B. Lord Ernle (1851-1937):

British agriculturist and politician.

Rowland Edmund Prothero was educated at Marlborough and Balliol College, Oxford, where he took his degree in 1875, subsequently being elected to an All Souls fellowship. He remained at Oxford for some years as a fellow and tutor, and became well known as an authority upon agriculture. He gained a 1st class honours degree in Modern History in 1875. He was a Fellow of All Souls' College, Oxford 1875-1891, and was Proctor in 1883-1884. He was awarded Members of the Royal Victorian Order in 1901

He published The Pioneers and Progress of English Farming in 1888 and edited Quarterly Review from 1893 to 1899. From 1898 to 1918, he was chief agent for the 11th Duke of Bedford, and in this capacity his experience on agricultural questions was much extended. In 1910 he unsuccessfully contested the Biggleswade and was elected as Conservative Member of Parliament for Oxford University at a by-election in 1914, holding the seat until 1919. He held office as President of the Board of Agriculture from 1916-19. In that role he introduced a guaranteed price for wheat.

He sat on the departmental committees on the home production of food (1914) and the increased price of commodities (1915), and in 1916, on the formation of Mr. Lloyd George's Government, was appointed a Privy Counsellor and became president of the Board of Agriculture. He resigned his office in 1919 and was raised to the peerage as 1st Baron Ernle in 1919, a title chosen in reflection of his pride in his own matrilineal descent from the Ernle family, one of the historic landed families of Sussex and Wiltshire. The barony became extinct upon his death.

Lord Ernie published Pioneers and Progress of English Farming (1887), and English Farming, Past and Present (1912); besides the Life and Correspondence of Dean Stanley (1893); Letters of Edward Gibbon (1896); a Memoir of Prince Henry of Battenberg (privately printed, 1897); Letters and Journals of Lord Byron (1898-1901) and Letters of Richard Ford (1905). His Psalms in Human Life (1903; enlarged 1913), tracing the influence of the Psalter on the notable men of succeeding generations, had a great popular success.

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Rowland_Edmund_Prothero_Ernle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rowland_Edmund_Prothero

C. Jethro Tull (1674-1741):

English agricultural pioneer during the Industrial Revolution and the Agricultural Revolution.

Jethro Tull invented the seed drill (in 1701), the horse-drawn hoe, and an improved plough. Tull was educated at Oxford, England where studied law, he later studied agriculture during his travels across Europe. He inherited land in the southern part of England where he put into practice his study of agriculture.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rowland_Edmund_Prothero

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Rowland_Edmund_Prothero_Ernle

http://www.litencyc.com/php/speople.php?rec=true&UID=4839

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/stead.young


His seed drill would sow seed in uniform rows and cover up the seed in the rows. Up to that point, sowing seeds was done by hand by scattering seeds on the ground. Tull considered this method wasteful since many seeds did not take root. The first prototype seed drill was built from the foot pedals of Jethro Tull's local church organ.

Jethro Tull was part of a group of farmers who founded the Norfolk system, an early attempt to apply science to farming. In 1731, he published The New Horse Houghing Husbandry: or, an Essay on the Principles of Tillage and Vegetation.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljethrotull.htm

D. Lord Charles Townshend (1674-1738):

English politician and agriculturalist. He was secretary of state under George I 1714-17, when dismissed for opposing the king's foreign policy, and 1721-30, after which he retired to his farm and did valuable work in developing crop rotation and cultivating winter feeds for cattle (hence his nickname).

Townshend did not, in fact, originate the new techniques with which his name has become associated. Turnips, for example, were already being grown in East Anglia, England, as a fodder crop from at least the 1660s, and it is unlikely that he ever adopted the four-course turnips-barley-clover-wheat rotation. This was not taken up until many years after his death. Through the successful development of his agricultural estate at Rainham in W Norfolk, however, Townshend brought a range of improved cultivation practices to wider public notice.

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Biographies/MainBiographies/T/Townshend/1.html

E. Thomas William Coke (1754-1842):

English agriculturist

Thomas William Coke, 1st Earl of Leicester (6 May 1754 – 30 June 1842) became famous for his advanced methods of animal husbandry used in improving his estate at Holkham in Norfolk. As a result, Coke of Norfolk is seen as one of the instigators of the British Agricultural Revolution.

Thomas Coke's efforts to improve the Holkham Hall estate became a marathon project which began in 1776 and lasted until his death in 1842. His land around Holkham in Norfolk was poor and neglected, but he introduced many improvements, obtained the best expert advice, and in a few years wheat was grown upon his farms, and the breed of cattle, sheep and pigs greatly improved. It has been said that "his practice is really the basis of every treatise on modern agriculture." Under his direction the rental of the Holkham estate is said to have increased from £2 200 to over £ 20,000 a year. People interested in farming were said to flock to gatherings at Holkham – the so-called Holkham shearings – from all over Britain and from overseas. The 'Shearings' were the fore-runners of today's agricultural shows. He is particularly credited with improvements to animal breeding and husbandry relating to cattle, sheep and pigs.

For most of his life, he was happy to remain plain Mr Coke: it is said that he had been offered a peerage seven times by six different Prime Ministers: sometimes by Whigs as a reward; at others by Tories as a bribe. Often celebrated by the title Coke of Norfolk, Coke was eventually ennobled by Queen Victoria in 1837, accepting a new Earldom of Leicester so that the sons of his second marriage might inherit his title, and was created Viscount Coke and Earl of Leicester, of Holkham in the County of Norfolk.

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Thomas_William_Coke,_Earl_Of_Leicester

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Coke,_1st_Earl_of_Leicester_(seventh_creation)

F. Collings Brothers:

Stock raisers, first scientific breeders of Shorthorn, or Durham, beef cattle.

Robert Colling (1749 - March 7, 1820), and his brother Charles (1751 - January 16, 1836), English stock breeders, famous for their improvement of the Shorthorn breed of cattle, were the sons of Charles Colling, a farmer of Ketton near Darlington. Their lives are closely connected with the history of the Shorthorn breed. Of the two brothers, Charles is probably the better known, and it was his visit to the farm of Robert Bakewell at Dishley that first led the brothers to realize the possibilities of scientific selective breeding of cattle. Charles succeeded to his father's farm at Ketton. Robert, after being first apprenticed to a grocer in Shields, took a farm at Barmpton. An


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Coke,_1st_Earl_of_Leicester_(seventh_creation)

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Thomas_William_Coke,_Earl_Of_Leicester

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Biographies/MainBiographies/T/Townshend/1.html

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljethrotull.htm


animal which he bought at Charles's advice for and afterwards sold to his brother, became known as the celebrated Hubback, a bull which formed the basis of both the Ketton and Barmpton herds.

The two brothers pursued the same system of inbreeding which they had learned from Robert Bakewell, and both the Ketton and the Barmpton herds were sold by auction in the autumn of 1810. Robert Colling died unmarried at Barmpton on the 7th of March 1820, leaving his property to his brother. Charles Colling, who is remembered as the owner of the famous bulls Hubback, Favorite and Comet, and the breeder of the celebrated Durham Ox, was more of a specialist and a businessman than his brother. He died on the 16th of January 1836.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Colling

G. Denis Papin (1647-1712):

French physicist, mathematician and inventor, best known for his pioneering invention of the steam digester, the forerunner of the steam engine.

Denis Papin attended a Jesuit school in Blois then, in 1661, he began his studies at the University of Angers. He graduated with a medical degree in 1669.

Papin assisted Huygens with air pump experiments from 1671 to 1674, during which time he lived in Huygens's apartments in the Royal Library in Paris. Papin went to London in 1675 to work with Boyle. He remained in this post until 1679 when he became Hooke's assistant at the Royal Society. Papin was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1680.

In 1681 Papin left for Italy where he was director of experiments at the Accademia publicca di scienze in Venice until 1684. There was an attempt to turn the Accademia in Venice into a Society modelled on the Royal Society in London and the Académie Royale in Paris but lack of financial support ended the attempt.

There were religious reasons why Papin could not return to France. He was a Calvinist, born into a Huguenot family, and after the Edict of Nantes which had granted religious liberty to the Huguenots was revoked by Louis XIV in 1685, he became an exile.

Papin returned to London in 1684 working again with the Royal Society until 1687. After this Papin left England and went to Hesse-Kassel where he was appointed professor of mathematics at the University of Marburg. He held this post until 1696 when he worked for the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel until 1707. This time in Hesse-Kassel was not a successful one for Papin who found himself in disagreement with his colleagues.

Papin is best known for his work as an inventor, particularly his work on the steam engine. In 1679 he invented the pressure cooker and, in 1690 he published his first work on the steam engine in De novis quibusdam machinis. The purpose of the steam engine was to raise water to a canal between Kassel and Karlshaven. He also used a steam engine to pump water to a tank on the roof of the palace to supply water for the fountains in the grounds. In 1705, when Leibniz sent Papin a sketch of a steam engine, Papin began working on that topic again and wrote The New Art of Pumping Water by using Steam (1707). He designed a safety valve to prevent the pressure of steam building up to dangerous levels.

Other inventions which Papin worked on were the construction of a submarine, an air gun and a grenade launcher. He tried to build up a glass industry in Hesse-Kassel and also experimented with preserving food both with chemicals and using a vacuum.

In 1707 Papin built the first paddle boat and that same year he returned to London where he lived in obscurity and poverty until his death. The date given for his death is only a guess since no records seem to exist of his last years in London. His last known letter is dated 23 January 1712.

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Papin.html

H. Thomas Savery (1650-1715):

English inventor, born at Shilstone, a manor house near Modbury, Devon, England.

Initially interested in naval applications of engineering (he designed an early paddle-wheel), Savery then became interested in pumping machines. On July 2, 1698 he patented an early steam engine, and in 1702 he published details of the machine in the book Miner's Friend, which claimed that it could pump water out of mines. Savery's pump had no piston, but used a combination of atmospheric pressure and steam pressure to raise water. The atmospheric action was limited to lifting a column of water about thirty feet high. This could be increased to about fifty feet by using


http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Papin.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Colling


steam pressure, but the extra stress placed on the boiler by this pressure made it unreliable. The machine was therefore not capable of raising water from the depth of a mine, and the almost only known working versions were used for water-supply pumping in London. However an attempt was made (unsuccessfully) to use one to clear water from a mine at Broadwaters in Wednesbury, then in Staffordshire.

Savery worked for the Sick and Hurt Commissioners. His duties took him to Dartmouth, which is probably how he came into contact with Thomas Newcomen. The Commissioners contracted the supply of medicines to the Navy Stock Company, which was connected with the Society of Apothecaries, John Meres being clerk to both.

In 1701, he obtained an Act of Parliament extending the life of his patent for a further 21 years, to 1733. Rights under this passed to the unincorporated Proprietors of the Invention for Raising Water by Fire. The John Meres was their secretary and treasurer.

By 1712, arrangements were made with Thomas Newcomen to develop Newcomen's more advanced design of steam engine, which was marketed under Savery's patent. Newcomen's engine worked purely by atmospheric pressure, thereby avoiding the dangers of high-pressure steam, and used the piston concept invented in 1690 by the Frenchman Denis Papin to produce the first steam engine capable of raising water from deep mines.

Several later pumping systems may be based on Savery's pump. For example, the twin-chamber pulsometer steam pump was a successful development of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Savery

I. Thomas Newcomen (1663-1729):

Ironmonger by profession, but made a significant contribution to the Industrial Revolution with his invention of the atmospheric steam engine.

Thomas Newcomen was born in Dartmouth, Devon in 1663 and established himself as an ironmonger in his home town. Some of his biggest customers were Cornish tin mine owners, who faced considerable difficulties with flooding as mines became progressively deeper. The standard methods to remove the water - manual pumping or teams of horses hauling buckets on a rope - were slow and expensive, and they sought an alternative.

Contemporary engines worked by using condensed steam to make a vacuum, but whereas Thomas Savery's pump of 1698 had just used the vacuum to pull the water up, Newcomen created his vacuum inside a cylinder and used it to pull down a piston. He then used a lever to transfer the force to the pump shaft that went down the mine: it was the first practical engine to use a piston in a cylinder. Casting the cylinders and getting the pistons to fit was pushing the limit of existing technology, so Newcomen deliberately made the piston marginally smaller than the cylinder and sealed the gap with a ring of wet leather or rope. However, to avoid infringing Savery's patent Newcomen was forced to go into partnership with him.

His first working engine was installed at a coalmine at Dudley Castle in Staffordshire in 1712. It had a cylinder 21 inches in diameter and nearly eight feet long, and it worked at twelve strokes a minute, raising ten gallons of water from a depth of 156 feet; approximately 5.5 horse power. The engines were rugged and reliable and worked day and night, but were extremely inefficient.

Newcomen engines were extremely expensive but were nevertheless very successful. By the time Newcomen died on 5 August 1729 there were at least one hundred of his engines in Britain and across Europe.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/newcomen_thomas.shtml

III.III.Historical FiguresHistorical Figures

A. George II (1683-1760:

George was elector of Hanover and second Hanoverian king of Great Britain and Ireland.

George was born in Hanover, Germany on 10 November 1683, the only son of the elector of Hanover. In 1705 he married Princess Caroline of Brandenburg-Ansbach, and they had nine children.

In 1714 George's father succeeded to the British throne, and created George prince of Wales. The relationship between father and son was already poor and the prince's London residence, Leicester


http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/newcomen_thomas.shtml

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Savery


House, became a rival court and focus for a dissident Whig group which included Robert Walpole. He encouraged a reconciliation between father and son. This led to Walpole's inclusion in George I's administration, whereupon he lost the prince's favour. Only Caroline's intervention kept Walpole in office when the prince succeeded to the throne in 1727. He cemented his position by securing George a Civil List (allowance) from Parliament of £800,000, considerably more than previous monarchs had received. Walpole also won acknowledgement of George's legitimacy from many influential Tories who supported the exiled Stuart pretender to the English throne. As a result, no senior politician deserted George's cause during the Jacobite Rebellion of 1745. Charles Edward Stuart, the 'Young Pretender' landed in Scotland but, after some initial success, was defeated at the Battle of Culloden in 1746.

George seemed destined to imitate his father, quarrelling with his son Frederick Louis, Prince of Wales, who in turn became a leader of an anti-administration faction. War broke out with Spain in 1739. In 1742 Walpole, who had dominated government since 1721, resigned. George quickly found another mentor in John Carteret who, with George, brought England into the War of the Austrian Succession (1740-48), prompting accusations that he was subordinating English interests to those of George's German possessions. In 1743, George led his troops into battle against the French at Dettingen, the last British king to fight alongside his soldiers.

During the last decade of his life George took little interest in politics. Britain's involvement in the Seven Years' War (1756 - 1763) was largely overseen by William Pitt the Elder. This period also saw the expansion of British influence in India and Canada with the military successes of Clive and Wolfe.

George died on 25 October 1760. Frederick had died in 1751, leaving George's grandson to inherit the throne.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/george_ii_king.shtml

B. Oliver Cromwell (1599 – 1658):

English soldier and statesman who helped make England a republic and then ruled as lord protector from 1653 to 1658.

Oliver Cromwell was born on 25 April 1599 in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire into a family of minor gentry and studied at Cambridge University. He became MP for Huntingdon in the parliament of 1628 - 1629. In the 1630s Cromwell experienced a religious crisis and became convinced that he would be guided to carry out God's purpose. He began to make his name as a radical Puritan when, in 1640, he was elected to represent Cambridge, first in the Short Parliament and then in the Long Parliament.

Civil war broke out between King Charles I and parliament in 1642. Although Cromwell lacked military experience, he created and led a superb force of cavalry, the 'Ironsides', and rose from the rank of captain to that of lieutenant-general in three years. He convinced parliament to establish a professional army - the New Model Army - which won the decisive victory over the king's forces at Naseby (1645). The king's alliance with the Scots and his subsequent defeat in the Second Civil War convinced Cromwell that the king must be brought to justice. He was a prime mover in the trial and execution of Charles I in 1649 and subsequently sought to win conservative support for the new republic by suppressing radial elements in the army. Cromwell became army commander and lord lieutenant of Ireland, where he crushed resistance with the massacres of the garrisons at Drogheda and Wexford (1649).

Cromwell then defeated the supporters of the king's son Charles II at Dunbar (1650) and Worcester (1651), effectively ending the civil war. In 1653, frustrated with lack of progress, he dissolved the rump of the Long Parliament and, after the failure of his Puritan convention (popularly known as Barebones Parliament) made himself lord protector. In 1657 he refused the offer of the crown. At home Lord Protector Cromwell reorganised the national church, established Puritanism, readmitted Jews into Britain and presided over a certain degree of religious tolerance. Abroad, he ended the war with Portugal (1653) and Holland (1654) and allied with France against Spain, defeating the Spanish at the Battle of the Dunes (1658). Cromwell died on 3 September 1658 in London. After the Restoration his body was dug up and hanged.

Cromwell's son Richard was named as his successor and was lord protector of England from September 1658 to May 1659. He could not reconcile various political, military and religious factions and soon lost the support of the army on which his power depended. He was forced to


http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/george_ii_king.shtml


abdicate and after the restoration of the monarchy in 1660 he fled to Paris. He returned to England in 1680 and lived quietly under an assumed name until his death in 1712

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cromwell_oliver.shtml

C. Abraham Darby (1678-1717):

English Quaker family that played a role in the Industrial Revolution.

Abraham Darby made scientific and industrial advances of such importance that he is directly responsible for the way we all live today. His advances have touched people in every part of the globe and played an important role in enabling Britain to become the World's most dominant industrial, military and colonial power in the 17th and 18th Centuries.

His work, inventions and innovations at his new factories at Cheese Lane (near Temple Meads in Bristol) and Baptist Mills were to prove of immense importance to the future British Industrial Revolution.

His important achievements during his 10 year stay in Bristol can be summarised as follows:

Developing a scientific understanding of the Brass making process. - thus transforming Britain into a Brass producer and exporter.

Personally going to Holland/The Low Countries and recruiting skilled, Catholic, brass workers who knew many of the industrial secrets of Brass production and the making of Brass Battery (This is the process of using water power to drive hammers which shaped cold brass plate into various types of hollowware).

He brought together the existing advances in iron casting technology and merged it with the expertise of brass founders who could make cast items which were more complex in shape and design

Casting Brass and Iron in sand moulds - a process which made production of cast iron and brass goods continuous. For the first time cast brass and ironware were not made on an individual basis. This was vital in being the first step towards 'factory-style' mass production and lead to massive increases in productivity, reduced unit costs and made 'goods' available to a wider geographical range of people. The advance of casting metals in sand was an important factor in stimulating consumer demand. The items produced were important in meeting the expanding export market - slave trade in West Africa and for industrial and domestic use in the new West Indian and American colonies.

Casting in sand allowed for more complex castings to be made - this was vital for the future production of steam engines and other machinery.

It can be safely said that he was the inventor of coke smelting. He used coal as a fuel for brass and cast iron manufactory. By 1700 there was a national scarcity of supplies of charcoal which was the fuel of metal making. Darby's successful experiments in using coal as a substitute for charcoal was a major factor in the future success of the British Industrial Revolution. [The year 1712 saw 250 tons of coal (400 horseloads a week) being used by the Baptist Mills Brass Works].

The Brass Works at Baptist Mills saw the creation of the World's first scientific Metallurgy Laboratory where, working with fellow Quaker, John Thomas, Darby made major advances in understanding the processes involved in producing, and maintaining the quality, of different types of brass.

Darby made significant advances in furnace design which were a result of his cross-over working in the fields of both Iron and Brass Manufacture.

After leaving the Bristol area in 1709 Darby set up Brass and Iron works in Shropshire. Here he continued to develop his revolutionary Industrial and Business Organisational methods. It was here, at Coalbrookdale , that he laid the foundations for what was to become the most important iron producing area in the world.

This further development, largely financed by Bristol Quakers, established what is now recognised as an Industrial Complex which is of World Importance. The area involved is now the Ironbridge Gorge Museums, on the banks of the River Severn and is designated a World Heritage Site.

http://www.cems.uwe.ac.uk/~rstephen/livingeaston/local_history/Darby.html


http://www.cems.uwe.ac.uk/~rstephen/livingeaston/local_history/Darby.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cromwell_oliver.shtml


D. John Wesley (1703-1791):

During the late Eighteenth Century, the pseudo-science of craniology attempted to explain the differences between saints and criminals (and other human differences) in terms of variations in the size, shape, and proportions of skulls. To advance this research, impressions of the faces of recently deceased persons were taken, producing what came to be called "death masks." Methodists prepared John Wesley's Death Mask, however, to insure that future statuary would represent him accurately. The mask is courtesy of the Drew University Methodist Collection (Madison, New Jersey).

Wesley died on Wednesday March 2, 1791, in his eighty-eighth year. As he lay dying, his friends gathered around him, Wesley grasped their hands and said repeatedly, "Farewell, farewell." At the end, summoning all his remaining strength, he cried out, "The best of all is, God is with us," lifted his arms and raised his feeble voice again, repeating the words, "The best of all is, God is with us."

http://wesley.nnu.edu/john_wesley/index.htm


http://wesley.nnu.edu/john_wesley/index.htm

the eighteenth century

Documents